How many homeowners “sneak” pets into their condo or HOA that prohibits pets? A recent ruling by the Fourth District Court of Appeals suggests that this conduct can be costly. Sun Harbor Homeowners’ Assoc.,Inc. v. Bonura centered on this very point. The homeowner Vincent Bonura’s fiancé Vidoni had a car accident and suffered from depression. However, she and Bonura moved the dog into their home without mentioning it to the HOA. Worse, they denied having the dog when they were confronted by the HOA.

Vidoni did not even see a psychiatrist until after the lawsuit was filed and then she had four visits. She claimed she needed it for depression resulting from the accident. Sun Harbor HOA was not buying it, and sued Bonura to remove the dog. Bonura claimed violations of the Florida and Federal Fair Housing Act. Bonura won at the trial level, and Sun Harbor appealed.

On June 13, 2012, the Fourth District Court of Appeals ruled that only the Federal Fair Housing Act was properly before the court, but noted that the result would be the same for a claim under the Florida Fair Housing Act . The Court then reversed the trial court’s ruling, stating that there was not “substantial, competent evidence to support the verdict and judgment.” In its opinion, the court laid out the facts which Bonura needed to prove to win the case:

That his fiancé Ms. Vidoni had a handicap (as defined by the Federal Fair Housing Act)

That Sun Harbor had knowledge of the handicap

That an accommodation may be necessary to afford Vidoni an equal opportunity to use and enjoy the dwelling

That the accommodation is reasonable

The HOA refused to make the requested accommodation.

The key mistake was the couple’s evasiveness. Even when confronted with numerous witnesses who saw the dog, Vidoni still did not ask the HOA to place her request for an accommodation on the agenda for a board meeting and did not explain her handicap. Based on that alone, the HOA’s position seems reasonable – they had no knowledge of a handicap and had not been asked for an accommodation until after the lawsuit was filed.

The Court also found that Vidoni did not adequately prove her emotional handicap. However, one must wonder if the Court might have been more willing to believe her had Vidoni been forthright and honest with the HOA. Her conduct did not foster confidence or credibility.

The lesson to be learned here? Don’t try to sneak a pet into your pet-restricted community and don’t lie when confronted about it. Judges are human, and credibility is vitally important in court.

Comments (1 Comment)

I exhibit dogs at dog shows and travel a lot … It’s hard to find knowledgeable people on this topic, but you sound like you know what you’re talking about! Thanks

Advertisement

DONNA DIMAGGIO BERGER is a Shareholder with the law firm of Becker & Poliakoff. She has represented all types of shared ownership communities throughout Florida over the last two decades and has worked closely with the Legislature to shape the laws that govern private residential communities.

LISA MAGILL is a shareholder in Becker & Poliakoff's statewide Community Association Law practice group. She has been a leader of and active in various organizations dedicated to community association issues, especially outreach and education.

LINDSAY RAPHAEL a partner with Tripp Scott, focuses her practice on condominium and homeowners association matters, as well as property financing and transaction counsel to buyers, sellers, lenders and developers of residential and commercial real estate. She is a regular contributor to Condo Management Magazine.

JEAN WINTERS has focused on representation of both community associations and homeowners living in associations since 2006. She is a partner at Winters & Winters, P.A. The firm has more than 30 years of combined experience in real property law.

The information and materials on this blog are provided for general informational purposes only and are not intended to be legal advice. Being general in nature, the information provided may not apply to your specific factual or legal set of circumstances. No attorney-client relationship is formed nor should any such relationship be implied. Nothing on this blog is intended to substitute for the advice of an attorney. If you require legal advice, please consult with a competent attorney licensed to practice in your jurisdiction.